The power of the CELL...

But seriously, its mostly down to the quality of the hardware/software library and decent marketing.

its not simply for that reason.

First off the ps3 and the xbox 360 is not at the same price point....its to my knowledge that for 299 usd u get a ps3 and one control, no games, and a 160gb hdd? for that same price u get the xbox 360 250gb sku with 2 controls and whatever game(s) is bundled. To me i see way more value in the 360 simply based on this price point.

Another thing, the games that release on the 360 is more well received by americans in general. In other words people see more value in just gears and halo than they do the entire ps3 exclusive line up, which is also to some degree understandable.

People like to play with there friends especially in this generation which is heavily focused on online multiplayer gameplay. If 8 out of my 10 friends have a 360, im getting a 360!

The xbox 360 arguably has better features to support online gameplay, mostly the cross game chat feature and the fact that most 360 owners have a headset.

And just in general the 360 appeals to people who dont want to be bothered with installs and so on, i find the 360 to be more accesible and this comes in to play slightly as well.

Marketing and perception is also important.

 Also,l dont think many people will agree with the "inferior capabilities" statement.

thats not a feature.

but anyway im pretty sure people with xbl gold and people who play on psn (obviously not 70 million or whatever) are very close. anyway that leads back to my 1st point you prefer it and others get it bc everyone else has it, ur friends have it, they have bc everyone else has it, new people get bc other have it. its a cycle. lol

@DjFlex53

i know xbox 1 was better, but im curious did it have any games with better graphics than GT4 and GOW2, i never owned an xbox so i dont know. because to my knowledge those were by far the best graphics (at least for what i saw).

also ps2 had like 10 billion games

Answers pretty obvious aint it?

Fanboys sell consoles. =)

Fanboys are unpaid PR zealots who visit sites such as VGCHARTZ in order to proclaim the supremecy of their respective consoles.

Hey before you say anything, at least remember that i dont pretend to be someone I'm not. =P

If word of mouth and familiarity sell a console, then how would you explain the failure of the Nintendo 64 and Gamecube? Both had plenty of Nintendo "core" games of Mario, Zelda, Metroid, and Donkey Kong.

Since I asked, let me answer to see how you would respond.

The Nintendo 64 released in 1996 was released more than 18 months after the Sony Playstation began the current PS1/N64 generation. This time gap along with Nintendo having scant 3rd party support essentially gave Sony the generation.

The Gamecube failed not because of time or price. Both were acceptable. You have to look at it from Sony's perspective:

The PlayStation 2 released in all territories in 2000 was the first video game console to take full advantage of the changing media formats not only for video games, but for home movie viewing. At the time, you would be hard pressed to find a DVD player cheaper than the Sony PlayStation 2.

Furthermore, the PlayStation 2 did not disappoint in it's game library. There were the Ratchet and Clank platformers along with Grand Theft Auto 3, Gran Turismo, and plenty of other games.

The Gamecube on the other hand followed a more traditionally Nintendo game library chuck full of 1st party offerings, yet very few 3rd party offerings. Released in 2001 in Japan and North America and 2002 in Europe and everywhere else, Nintendo not going with DVD killed them. Just literally killed them because at a time when the world was transitioning from VHS to DVD, Nintendo looked to the past, got defensive, and paid for it big time with the Sony PlayStation 2 going on to sell more consoles than any other console before or after.

Current day, Sony has not had the luck with Blu-Ray the same way they did with DVD. The price point was too high with entry level between $500 and $600. The world was not ready to convert over to Blu-Ray in 2006 and even now, Blu-Ray is transitioning a lot slower as the preferred media format than DVD did in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Sony thought they could replicate the PS2's success on the PS3 with a new media format and overshot badly.

Did I leave anything out?

Oh, as for the OP, I believe it is games. People buy video game consoles to play games. Only once in history have we seen people buy a video game console en masse to use it for purposes other than video games. That one time was the Sony PlayStation 2.

1) actually xbox 250gb with one controller, no game costs $299 just like ps3 160gb one controller. but if you going by gb size to say they arent the same cost then i could use the  $399 320gb move ps3 with game vs $399 250gb kinect xbox with game.

and since ur talking about value xbox has $60 online, for new HDD you need proprietary $130 HDD, (historically $150 wifi addon, not needed for current models) no bluray, but $200 hddvd add-on (discontinued). $150 kinect vs $100 move. kinect games $50 vs $40 move games.

2)  well those are just two games ps3 has tons of games to counter like Uncharted, resistance, killzone, and socom. those definitely seem like games that would appeal to americans, if they were on xbox they would sell millions. furthermore most games on xbox are multiplats, so you could arguably play the better version on ps3 (free online, on xbox ur locked out of part of the game unless you pay more)

3) the bolded. thats my point, you play it bc every one else does

4) well im sure u mute almost every one whos not ur friend any way, i know i do (people get annoying) anyone ps3 mics arent proprietary so you can get any u want (does xbox still come with mics is thought they stopped) to me psn is better and has the better features because of things like the internet browser, and its openness. see portal 2 for ps3, thats not possible on xbl, speaking of which do you really think a game like little big planet is possible on xbl (i really dont know, but i assume not). also psn has more dedicated server games than xbl, and xbl pays (for what exactly???)

5) thats a thing of the past, even the best looking games on console dont require an install like GOW3, uncharted 1 and 2, killzone  3 (but then theres GT5... lol)

1. yeah i see now that i was wrong about that. But surely u agree that the 299 sku of the 360 is more flexible when it comes to pricing ? the ps3 160gb sku is almost never compromised on. Holiday bundles etc. usually the 360 gets better deals. I see this in my country a lot and id imagine its more so in the USA.

When i said value i meant face value what consumers will perceive to be better value...or if i was a consumer how i would perceive that.

2. I was just using gears and halo as the example of games which push xbox 360 in the usa i wasnt comparing them in any other way to ps3 exclusives...u make as if americans are buying 360's without having any tangible reason at all besides because its what every else buys, im simply saying thats just one reason. And if killzone, lbp, uncharted were all as well received as gears and halo, then ps3 sales would have skyrocketed but they havnt. which means those games do not have the same broad appeal as the gears or halo. Im not at all saying they are inferior. btw i see uncharted as potentially having broad appeal...

3. we agree on this but its not the only reason, its one of many.

4.personally i feel psn is better. But once again people perceive live to be better...perception is key. The reality of one being better than the other is debatable and is a matter of opinion.

5. installs are way more common on ps3 even at this point in the gen. all 360 games do not require an istall.

But  i think my main point is, perception or the genral perception of a console versus another that sways people to buy one over the other.

First, I never said the Xbox 1 was better. I thought we were discussing, in your words, "inferior capabilities". I was thinking about the Xbox hard drive and XBL online as superior capabilities than on the PS2.

AFAIK, GT4 looked better on Xbox than on PS2. GOW2 was released after the 360 came out so there's really nothing to compare it with. There were no new Xbox games :)

It so is a feature. If they cut PSN the complaint would be 'Sony removed a feature of the PS3'.